~ Plantlife Protection ~  
("Vegetivism")
 
 
 
"Vegetivism"  
 
briefly can be described as:
 
 "Respecting life and well-being of
 all kinds of plants to a degree as large as possible"
 
---- 
 
Plants are among people's best friends !!!!!!!!
 

They naturally give them:

- The possibility to enjoy their admirable beauty.

- Fresh air, full of oxigen and vitamins, to breath in.

- The possibility to enjoy their fragrance.

- Their delicious fruits, also being the best food, there is around.

- A soft earthface to lie, sleep, walk and fall on.

- Fallen twigs, to make objects from.

- Cotton.

- Hay and straw (plants themselves, after they have died off naturally);

- Very good company and a natural home feeling out in the green, (on condition one is sufficiently friendly

   to them).  

                        

 

 

Isn't it unbelievable, that they are

still treaten as rudely, as they use to be?   

You don't do that to your best friends !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

-You don't eat them; (leafy, stem, root vegetables)

-You don't poison them (weeds);

-You don't tear or cut them in two (picking flowers, mowing grass);

-You don't pick off parts of their body (f.i. their leafs to make tea or tobacco from)

-You don't cut off parts of their body (f.i. their leafs to make cane suger from);

-You don't saw off parts of their body (their branches);

-You don't use their killed body as buildingmaterial; (wood from cut trees)

-You don't cut in their skin, to make rubber out of their 'blood'.

-You don't do anything, that brings along the risk, that you will burn them alive (forest fire, verge fire);
 
-You don't simply set them in fire massively (in tropical rainforests in order to gain cheap agricultural ground; in other forests in order to gain ground for housing projects).
 
-You don't pull them out of the ground and let them die of dehydration, before picking their fruits (peanuts); 
 
 
Special items  

- Protection of Trees 

- Protection of the Grassplant 

- Arguments against mowing

 
 
 
 
Protection of Trees
  
 "Wood is used as little, as possible"; what does this mean in practise?
- One of the first things to think off, is, that this material is left out as far as possible in building and furnishing houses. A very positive side-effect of this is, that thus the risk of fire is reduced strongly. In a way it's unconceivable, that this material keeps being used, while so many victims have been made already by buildings getting into fire.
 
- Secondly one may think of reduction of paper use; for in the production of this material mostly wood is used. Years ago already has been suggested, that apart from daily newspapers, also weekly ones might be edited. This, because for many it's not possible, or not necessary, to read a newspaper every day; they simply haven't got the time for that, or receive the main part of their information in this respect from other means, like radio-, tv-, and/or internet. In these and other cases a paper, bringing the news of the past week would be a usefull alternitive, respectively completion. If than these now subscribers of daily papers would instead subsribe a weekly, this certainly would lead to a conciderable reduction of paper use and as a result sparing of tree-lives.
 
- Trees in tropical rainforests are not only dropped for their expensive wood, like mahony, ebony and teak; many others use to be burned down, so that the ground, that comes free in this way, can be used for agricultural purposes. In these two ways, yearly a forest area, as big as Great-Brittain is destroyed. When this keeps going on, in some thirty-five years there will be no more 'lungs of earth' at all then. The best way, to reduce the constantly growing need of agricultural ground, is changing the now most current eating pattern into the vegetarian one; for growing plantfood takes much less ground, than production of animal food. ---
 
- Very often trees are cut, in order to built houses on the spot, where they were groing. One can ask oneself, in how far all miserable things, that later on happen in those new built houses, must be seen as a punishment, which wouldn't have been put on apply, when instead of removing these wonderfull creatures, some kind of a home would have been constructed or stationed under and between those trees.
 
- Fir-trees are very popular trees; so popular, that in winter they are cut by the billions, so that their dead body, decorated and well, can be placed in a livingroom. Indeed it would be more wise, to bike or even walk to a fir-tree forest in those days and enjoy the elegance and good smell of living examples there.
 
Protection of the Grassplant
 
 
 
 
To many a grasplant is no taller than about 1 ft. (30 cm).
In fact however it will grow up to some six or seven ft. (2 m.), if just it gets
the chance to live it's life, without it's leaves being cut off, in one of the ways, this often happens:
 
1)  Biten off by grazing cattle.Cattle in nowadays situation very often has nothing else to eat, but grass, grass and grass. Naturally there are also fruittrees in their 'meadow', as a result of which the animals can also eat fruits, that have fallen from the trees, or are on low branches.
(The NPF would like to see researched, whether cattle would indeed not eat any grass at all, if it would have plenty of fruits to eat. In other words, whether Creation's system is thus, that grassplants as well can allways have their full developement (live their full life), which means, that they can grow up to their full length and have their elegant seed-panicle on top.
If this would turn out to be the case, then this plant can be food for animals anyway in winter, when it's leafes have died off naturally and are hay. This natural hay stays intact, untill new plants come up in springtime. So in winter, when there's less fruit around, the ripened plant can serve as additional food for animals; animals, that don't have to pass winter in a stable (on condition, that natural shelter outside has not been destroyed, or has been restored).
What is happening nowadays however, mostly is, that grassplants are cut in two (mowed), while they are still alive, after which the cut-off parts are dried and stored up as (unnatural) hay.
 
2)  Mowed by a farmer, who makes hay or other food of it, which is used in winter, when the catttle is on the stable.
 
3)  Another situation, in which the grassplant is mowed, is the 'bloodshed' that takes place, where municipals mow their verges and bank-overgrowths.
These are often the only forms of natural vegetation in 'civilised area'. And that sometimes shows; this cannot be outshined by any gardener. The little bouquets, that are layed down here and there by 'Nature' itself, are a true lust for the eye (and the nose) of the passing naturefriend. As a consequense, year after year he asks himself, why this festival has to end so rudely, after one or two months. It may be true, that safety of traffic sometimes demands some mowing, here and there. But there are several heavy reasons, to limit it as strongly as possible. These reasons are mentioned in the special item hereabove.
 
4)  Furthermore there is the mowing of greenswards. Indeed, a mowed lawn gives a cleaned-up impression; but a wild garden has so much more to offer (at least for insiders; may their number grow quickly and plentyfully!).
 
Arguments against mowing
 
  
        
 
The following arguments in principal plead against mowing plants.
 
1)  Mowing is nothing less, than cutting living beings in two. Although one may say, that it has never been prooved, that plants have emotions and feel pain, it also is true, that the contrary never has been prooved either.So to play it safe and not take the risk, one does something very cruel to another living being, (which by the way in the system of nature always seems to be punished one way or another), it might be much wiser, not to mow more than absolutely unavoidable in the nowadays situation. 
2)  Especcially when a motorised mowing machine is used, it often happens, that not just the mowed plants are cut in peaces. For in many cases, in between these plants several kinds of animals are living. Whereas the grown up among them can fly away, the very young, that still are in a nest, mostly cannot and simply are crushed by the knifes. A lot of this misery can be avoided by taking care, that at least those knifes are in a height of twenty centimeters (ten inches) or more above the ground.
3)  One of the main reasons, why municipalities etc. use to mow overgrowth of verges and public parks several times a year, is, that in this way these surfaces keep having a fresh young-green look. The cause of this is, that the mowed leaves die off, so that the plant has to produce new ones, that indeed look like new grass, coming up in springtime, even if it is high-summer, or autumn.
What in fact happens here, in a way can be compared with a human massacre. When somewhere thousands of people have been killed in a civil war or such, after a while a new generation will come and take in the places of the murdered. Can one say then: "You see, now we have a young and fresh new generation, whiler otherwise, there would be much more older people among us?"
Only in springtime nature should look like in springtime; in other seasons it has to look in it's specific outfit for then. Otherwise one looses the sight on natural order, becomes unrealistic and enlargens the chance, one will be 'mowed down' sooner or later him/herself, although this is not part of natural system.
 
4)  It's a generally known fact, that the neighbourhood of plants is a positive factor for human's health. They purify (if necessary) the air and put something salutary in it; (either fragrant, or not). It's stimulating effect can be compared with the one of sunshine and of refreshing raindrops. Allthough this seems to be not scientifically prooved yet, one might suppose, that it concerns vitamins or something comparable, here.
Anyway, certain is, that plants, of which the leaves are cut off as good as completely, can no longer exert this well-doing function, because they can only do that with their leaves. With them they breath out (evaporate) the water they sucked up from the soil with their roots; purified and full of healthy elements.
So the conclusion must be, that mowing is rather disadvantageous for health of people, living in their neighbourhood.
 
5)  Plants need water. They suck it out of the ground and store it up in their stem and their leaves. In this way they can use it, when they need it, like in periods of drought. But when the parts in which those reserves were stored up, are cut off by a mowing machine, they're gonna be out of water and die off relatively soon.
(This by the way is the cause of the fact, that in summer so often there are big brown (dead) spots in greenswards and verges (whereas the responsable functionaries ordered to mow them, with the intention to make them look as fresh and green as in springtime in other seasons as well).
 
Another aspect of onmowed plants using and storing up water, is, that in wet, rainy periods there is less rainwater left in the soil, than in case plants there are mowed and as a result can store up very little of that water.
Especcially in low land this makes a big difference; the more water is left in the soil, the bigger the chance is, that this soil becomes muddy.
 
(Although not concerning mowing, in this context it can be pointed out, that the environmental problem of sea-level constantly rising, is caused for an essential part by the cutting of trees in (among others tropical rain) forests. on the gigantic scale as it does nowadays. All those, sometimes up to a hundred meter high, trees used to store up enourmous volumes of water. Now that they cannot any more, so much more water is getting into the oceans).
 
6)  Mowing overgrowths of verges hardly ever is necessary. Only in a few places, (like dangerous curves in a road), safety of traffic can demand, that parts of them are removed.
For the rest they can grow and stay intact all of the season, without any kind of drawback.
An advantage on the other hand is, (apart from what is mentioned above already), beauty;
plants, including nettels and thistles, look much more esthetic, when they are in their natural shape, than when they are reduced to stubs.
Also they then give a much more cosy sphere.
 
Sometimes as a reason for mowing the fact is mentioned, that "otherwise shrubs will start growing there". This seems to be unwanted, notwithstanding the fact, that shrubs along a road can bring shelter against the wind and can function as a shield, especcially for bikers on a separated bicycle-track.
And what's more, to avoid growth of shrubs, it does, to mow one time a year at the end of winter, with the knifes no lower than some 30 centimeters (or 1 feet) above the groundsurface.
Any time that is mowed more often, is to be qualified as (among other things) simply throwing away tax-money.
 
7)  In nature mowing is a very saddening activity. Every minute of it thousands of living beings are killed or mutilated by those knifes.
Plantfriends notice that.
That's also why they can imagine, that it's a sign of nature's incensedness, that after mowing, very often not the same, initially variated and colourfull vegetation comes back, but a more unpleasant one. After a few times often mainly, or just, nettles and thistles still grow there, while at first there were flowers like oxeye daisies, cornflower and poppies to be admired.
 
 
 
 
-----------

See also:

Life friendly agriculture:   https

----------
 
Organisation
 
 
Those, who agree with what is posed above, presumably also agree with
 
the statement, that it would be a good thing if soon an 

"International Society for the Protection of Plant life"

would be founded, after the example of
 
the many already existing animal protecting organisations.
  
They hereby are invited to let know they want to contribute in the founding of this "ISPP".  
 
 
 

  

-------------- 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
©   Copyright Nicolas Pleumekers --- (Nature Protection Foundation ht  natubico@mail.com)